Motorola has a long, long history of suing people and businesses over patents and using the government to harass and intimidate researchers. They were the final defendant to lose to Armstrong's widow in 1967 after the supreme court refused to hear their appeal. This was 13 years after he killed himself over this litigation. Till the end, they maintained they invented FM.

I'm currently fighting several parallel SLAPP suits from a Motorola dealer for and exposing his resume as being likely fabrications.

Given that these are ATSC models, it's a US/Canadian/Mexico/Korea only model.

This is the link to the real archive, no need obscure the link to it.

Mel Brooks should direct it.

It's about money to the recording industry. It's not artists suing.

Make the most boorish offensive Australian shows you can. Maybe Sir Les Patterson had a son; he's appointed ambassador to Thailand and has a thing for ladyboys (just like the old man, RIP).

It was the best of times, it was the blurst of times.

He decided to go out at a prime age.

A person who drives a hatchback is the same person who wants to "shift" their EV.

I'd sooner drive a mini-van than a hatchback. Avoid the gas guzzler tax too.

A ICE car has a power band, and you need a transmission to make use of it. Shifting it has purpose and requires skill. Mastering this skill is fun.

Fake shifting an EV degrades its performance, has no purpose and requires no skill.

Sadly today's EFF is not the EFF of 20 years ago. There's enough of these cases now that outside of somewhere like slashdot they don't make the news or if they do, get remembered, let alone bring any help to the affected party.

Yes, but as someone currently being sued in an over 200 page SLAPP suit, you still have to defend it. I'm about 65k into this and 2+ years of time has elapsed. I've recently become aware of the same suit being filed by the same Plaintiff in another state now, but I've not been served in this new, parallel, litigation.

The system assumes the Plaintiff's complaint is truthful and it is the responsibility of the defendant to prove otherwise. A defendant must pay for and retain expert witnesses to refute each claim. As an example:

The website of Defendant actively solicits persons visiting the site to make payments by cryptocurrency, stating, “I support strong crypto. My gpg key is below, please use it.”

Reading this makes my head hurt, but if it gets to court, I'll need to hire an expert witness (likely 10-20k USD) to refute that. This is just one of the many idiotic claims made in such a SLAPP suit.

Most people do not have the financial resources necessary to defend such a case. Also if you get it dismissed on jurisdictional or anything before a full trial (summary judgement), you generally are unable to recover attorney's fees.

This entire action is from a small business owner selling products in the radio enthusiast community who went off over some facebook meme. Basic research found out he was a convicted felon and had made up multiple lies on his public resume. He's suing over publishing his records from PACER.

I wish this researcher the best of luck.

This is not true for the majority of the IP space they own. Example, 38/8 is owned by Cogent and was given to them by the US gov in 1991, predating IANA, ARIN and the whole RIR system. These legacy IP's are owned property per the US DoC/NTIA/NSF and court decisions.

Cogent doesn't even support IPv6 properly. They lack transit to about half the IPv6 internet still. This is even more funny when you consider they host a root server (c.root-servers.net).

wow, so impressive.